This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Sep. 13, 2012

William C. Price

See more on William C. Price

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP Los Angeles Litigation Specialties: patent and antitrust law



Price won two huge victories against Rambus Inc. during the past year, most recently when the U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that the company's patents were invalid and unenforceable.


Theodore R. Essex, an ITC administrative law judge, ruled in March that Rambus' patent case rested on "unreliable and false testimony in many important respects." In July, the commission affirmed the judge's decision, which Price said "was a lawyer's dream." Certain Semiconductor Chips and Products Containing the Same, 337-TA-753 (ITC, filed Dec. 1, 2010).


He also successfully defended client Micron Technology Inc. against Rambus' price-fixing claims in San Francisco Superior Court last year. Rambus had sought damages approaching $12 billion. Price worked with a team of lawyers led by Kenneth Nissly of O'Melveny & Myers LLP, who represented co-defendant Hynix Semiconductor America Inc.


In the ITC case, Price and fellow Quinn Emanuel partner Charles K. Verhoeven represented 29 defendants from the semiconductor industry. Price said that their strategy was to present live testimony, rather than rely on prior transcripts, so that Essex could judge their demeanor and credibility for himself. Their main strategy was to demonstrate that Rambus had destroyed pertinent documents related to the case.


"We thought that even though we had good patent arguments, that those are the kind that don't tug on your emotions," Price said. "The judge was able to see high-ranking executives give different stories to justify what they did and their absolute failure to recall anything."


In a transcript of the administrative law judge's ruling, Essex said, "Not since the long ago era of the Watergate hearings have the words 'I don't recall' been used so regularly in answering questions under oath.'"


Price said, "You rarely see a judge come down that harshly on a witness' credibility. The administrative law judge was upset."


Another challenge, Price said, was that judges tend to be hesitant in granting remedies when patents can't be enforced.


"You have to move the trier of facts to impose penalties and convince him that it was a conspiracy to affect the judicial process."


Price said that he did this simply by getting Rambus witnesses to make statements that didn't make sense.


"A lot of lawyers are afraid of getting answers that could hurt them," he said. "But it can be an opportunity."

- PAT BRODERICK

#272531

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com